Film or Digital?

I often have the debate with clients and fellow photographers over the use of film or digital medium when photographing weddings. I want to share my experiences with everyone regarding the age old debate.

Let me start by saying the most important thing : photos taken using film and photos taken from a digital camera are not the same. With photos taken on a film camera your going to be getting much more detail. Your going to be able to see the pollen on each of your rose pedals in your beautiful bouquet; your also going to be able to see the pores on your skin if the camera is close enough. The next most obvious pro with film is the colors. With digital photos, your not going to get the amazing dark blacks and radiant reds that you are accustomed to with film.

So why doesn't everyone just shoot in film since the photos that you get look so much better? I have my own reasons why I only shoot digital, but I decided to ask my fellow wedding photographer Jeff his views on the subject. Jeff told me "While film does offer the superior image quality, what it lacks is how fast it captures the image. In lament terms, when I am photographing a wedding, I need something that can take up to 10 shots per second. I need to capture the precise moment in time that the bride is throwing her bouquet and it is at the top of it's flight towards all the single ladies. With digital I can do that, with film, I can't". Jeff brings up a great point here. Film is great for capturing still moments in time. It suffers when objects are moving.

My main reason for not using film is cost. It does not cost me anything to "develop" my digital photos. With companies that produce film going out of business each week it seems, it keeps on getting more expensive to purchase and develop film. If I were to incur the cost that comes with using film, then I would have to past that cost onto my customers, which is the last thing I want to do.

With film, it would be much harder to capture precise moments like this.